The question in this case is whether a criminal defendant’s prior conviction by a court lacking subject matter jurisdiction bars retrial of that defendant in a court having subject matter jurisdiction. We hold that it does not, and therefore affirm the superior court.
This is the second time this case has been before this Court.
The first time this case was before us, the issue was whether the probate court conviction should be set aside as null and void under OCGA § 40-6-376 (d). We answered in the affirmative, but limited our opinion to construction of this statute. We deferred Perkins’s claims that the double jeopardy clauses of the state and federal constitutions barred his retrial until such time as the superior court had ruled upon them.
1. This Court has held that when a court had no subject matter jurisdiction to try a defendant, any conviction entered by that court is null and void.
2. Perkins’s contention that OCGA § 40-6-376 (d) is unconstitutional on its face is without merit.
Judgment affirmed.
Notes
State v. Perkins,
Id. at 623.
Mayo v. State,
Weatherbed,
